As a graduate student in New York City I worked on a
multi-year research project that sought to find out more about how recent
immigrants in the United States raised very young children. The goal of the
project was to see how young children of immigrants develop and get ready for
school and life in the U.S. more generally, given that many immigrants, and
Latinos in particular, find themselves at the lower levels of the socioeconomic
ladder as they move from childhood to adulthood.
As part of my work I visited two families who were
originally from Mexico every two months for three years. I spent time with them
in their homes, ate meals with them, played with their children in the park,
and went on errands with them as they parented. I watched the kids grow from
infants to toddlers to preschoolers. Given that mothers take on the majority of
the childrearing in most cultures, especially Mexican culture, most of the
focus was on them and their childrearing beliefs and practices.
Each time I visited I had a pre-defined agenda of topics to
discuss, such as the experience of migrating, education, and struggles with
learning English. On one occasion I had the task of discussing what life was like
for a female immigrant, how the roles of women were different in the U.S. and
Mexico, and how their ideas of what it meant to be a woman had changed since
their move. I vividly remember the large grin that appeared on one mother’s
face as she discussed her work life in the United States. She worked as a
waitress in a Mexican restaurant making a very good wage. She said that apart
from the money, one of the most satisfying parts of her job was to go into the
kitchen and give the patrons’ orders to the cooks, who were all men. She
delighted in teasing them for doing “women’s work” and for her ability to
“order them around.” She said that it was empowering to be able to earn a good
wage, but also to have some freedom and authority that she may not have had if
she were in Mexico. This type of liberation among Latina immigrant women has been documented in a few research studies, and changing gender roles are a
somewhat unintended consequence of migration. I think that for Latinas, these
transformations are especially pronounced given the male-dominated, macho
culture in which many of them were reared.
The other side of this gender coin is that men must
sometimes re-adjust to their new status as dishwashers, cooks, or
launderers-positions that they would probably hesitate to share with men in
their home country. Men have devised a
number of “civilized” ways to maintain their privileged status as this completely un-ironic scorecard from the nineteen-fifties shows; it grades woman
on how well they perform their roles and behave toward their men. When the upper
hand that men have is threatened, they sometimes resort to less civilized
coping mechanisms such as drinking. The trump card that men hold, given their
biological advantages of size and strength, is to physically impose their
dominance through violence, an issue that many Latinas face, especially
immigrant Latinas. Shockingly, well over half of immigrant women experience physical or sexual abuse in their lives.
Among the most vulnerable immigrant Latinas are those who
are undocumented or who are in the process of becoming legal residents with the
help of their citizen husbands. Immigrant women without legal status or who are
dependent on a partner to achieve legal residency can easily find themselves at
the mercy of the whims of their male spouses. The risk of losing access to
legal status by ending an abusive, violent relationship could lead women to
stay in situations that are harmful or life-threatening. Further, undocumented
women may be hesitant to report abuse to police out of fear of being deported
or detained indefinitely in prison-like conditions. Deportation and detention
can lead to separations from family members and loved ones, especially young
dependent children.
Thankfully, in 1994 Congress passed the Violence Against
Women Act, which aimed to provide resources to all women residing in the U.S.
with the goal of dealing with violence and abuse through treatment and
prevention. There are progressive and libertarian concerns that some provisions
of the Act, which call for harsh punishment of male offenders and invasive
monitoring, infringe on liberties and are more punitive than restorative.
Critics also contend that the law paints too broad a brush stroke that portrays
most men as potential abusers. Perhaps this is true, but when one in three adult women in the U.S. report having been victims of sexual abuse, such laws
don’t seem that unreasonable.
Notwithstanding these criticisms, the law was reauthorized
in 2000 and again in 2005. In 2000 provisions were added to protect immigrant
and undocumented women from the pitfalls of reporting abuse that I mentioned
above. It gave any migrant women who reported abuse temporary legal status
while in the country, so they did not have to fear being deported or detained
for coming out of the shadows. In some cases, immigrant women received a
U-Visa, which even provided a path toward residency for these women. Some have
claimed that women will take advantage of this law by faking abuse in order to
receive legal status, although they must still prove the abuse through the
courts; it seems a little far fetched that one could feign abuse well enough to
pass that standard.
In 2011, the law was up for reauthorization, however,
congress failed to pass it a couple of times, with one of the most contentious
pieces being the provision of services to undocumented immigrants. Part of the
failure to reauthorize may have been political gamesmanship during an election
year. Conservative Republicans likely did not want to appear to be supporting
more government spending, especially on non-citizens. However, with the
presidential loss, Republicans have been rethinking their political strategy,
especially when it comes to immigrants and Latinos, the latter group who many
believe was and will be decisive in elections to come. That is probably why
after the election that the senate overwhelming approved the reauthorization of
the law with a vote of 78-22.
The biggest piece of note in this vote, which is connected to
Latino and immigrant issues, is that the only two Republican Latino senators
voted against the reauthorization of the law. Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio
of Florida are considered the new hotshots of the party that will lead them to
victory by garnering the Latino vote. Again, however, we see that simply having
a Spanish surname is not enough. If the Republicans ever expect to gain inroads
with Latinos, they can’t rely on old macho ideology, but they must also
remember that our Latina mothers, sisters, and daughters deserve some respect,
too.
Nice piece.
ReplyDelete